On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 23:01:38 +0100, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 25/06/16 22:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 22:34:46 +0100, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 25/06/16 22:30, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 25 Jun 2016 22:13:18 +0100, "michael adams"
wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 25/06/16 17:41, TimW wrote:
On 25/06/16 13:08, Richard wrote:

Democracy is not about half the people subjecting the other half to
their views. That isn't democracy at all.

Got news for you sweety - that's exactly how it works.


But that's not how representative democracy works, which is the normal form of
government in the UK.

In recognition of the fact that half of the voting population are of below average
intelligence and are unlikely to understand complex issues, they elect people
who they believe they can trust to decide those issues on their behalf.

Now under normal circumstances whether these representatives are
worthy of their trust will not be an issue as they're always subject to selection
committes where questions of propriety are involved. And in any case this
may well cancel itself out over the whole body of MPs and the large
number of issuse on which they'll decide.

In the case of the refendum there were no such representatives. While
the politicians promoting Leave all told blatant lies about the inevitable
effect of Leave on the UK economy.

In the absence of a second refendum or similar I sincerely believe
that once the effects of this decision have played out, effects which
could have been forseen by the prominent Leave promoters had they
chosen to look, then these people should be either removed from office, or
dragged from their bolt-holes if they've sunk off in the meantime and
tried for Treason. Just as would have happened in the good old days.

Well said. A good 'real world' overview.

Cheers, T i m


No - it's the whine of a bad loser who wants us to do it again because
we got it wrong.

Can you show me where michael mentions anything like that?

Er - everything he says is the sound of a poor loser.

To you I'm guessing. No actual proof / facts then? I wonder where we
have heard that before. ;-)


Sorry if 'a discussion' on this subject gets you all defensive. ;-(

It doesn't. What gets my goat are a majority 1.3 million people voting
one thing,

But still described as 'A country divided on the news just now. Does
that sound like a positive / definitive decision in favour of one
direction to you?

and 2 million people (presumably those who voted for the
other thing) starting a petition whining about how it's not fair, or
it's not what people really voted for, or it's all the media's and/or
government's fault.

Nice emotive words there.

How about just more of your democracy in action? There have been many
instances where the people 'rebelled' against something (Poll tax for
one) and it was changed.

We voted. The vote was to leave, unambiguously, by the rules. End of.

No, that's the point, it's not the 'end of' until article 50 is filed
and two years later no counter deal offered.

And to the whiners: Grow up, man up, and get on with securing the future.

Or ... that could be seen as 'I think we got away with it, let's close
the doors before anyone notices'?


If you got what you wanted, and are wholly positive regarding the
outcome, why do you even care?

Because I have this nasty lurking suspicion that Article 50 is not going
to get signed.

Bingo. ;-)

The PM has already reneged on a strongly implied
statement that he would do it quickly.

And I wonder why? Maybe he is sensing the mood of the people and along
with many others (including many who just stuck a cross in the Leave
box possibly), doesn't want to burn any bridges just yet?

Now, if the vote for Leave was 75 to 25%, I'd be with you 100% but it
wasn't, far from it. I'm not saying there that it should make any
specific numbers or percentage, I'm just saying 'if it was'.


Maybe you are frightened that if the government back out of the
promise to take the UK out of the EU and / or have another referendum
that 'now' the outcome might be different. 'Now' more people better
realise / understand the consequences?

No - I am afraid that a fair and straight forward vote will be cast
aside because some cry babies, immature idiots and lazy thick people
claimed they didn't understand it.

But again, that's neither the point or the whole story is it. Many
people are now just starting to fully understand the consequences of a
Leave result and are possibly regretting it. So the vote as it was
first taken potentially didn't actually reflect the opinion of the
people (once educated) and as time goes on and more FACTS come out
there is a chance that 'concern' will grow.

Now, 'of course' if you were vehemently set on having your own way
(and it seems the case you were) rather being agreeable to the real
and (now / better) educated opinion of the people, then I can see why
you are so frustrated.

And remember, I have no idea what would be best for us, short or long
term, I'm just interested that whatever we do *IS* the actual / real
fully considered choice of the majority.

Out of the frying pan ... ?

Cheers, T i m